Castillo v. Macomber

Castillo · United States District Court for the Eastern District of California · July 28, 2025 · No. No. 1:24-cv-01586-KES-SAB (HC)

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California adopted the magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations and dismissed Manuel Anthony Castillo’s 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition without prejudice for failure to exhaust state judicial remedies. The court directed the clerk to close the case and declined to issue a certificate of appealability.

Court
United States District Court for the Eastern District of California
Jurisdiction
United States District Court for the Eastern District of California
Decision date
July 28, 2025
Docket number
No. 1:24-cv-01586-KES-SAB (HC)
Procedural posture
State prisoner filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The district court adopted the magistrate judge's findings and recommendations and dismissed the petition without prejudice for failure to exhaust state judicial remedies.
Standard of review
De novo review under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) of the magistrate judge's findings and recommendations because the district court reviewed the matter under the referral statute; certificate-of-appealability determination governed by the standard stated in Slack v. McDaniel.
Precedential value
unpublished district court order
Disposition
dismissed

Topics

federal habeas corpuspost-conviction reliefappellate procedurestandard of review

Practice areas

habeas corpuspost-conviction relieffederal civil procedureappellate procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the petition for a writ of habeas corpus should be dismissed without prejudice for failure to exhaust state judicial remedies.
  2. Whether the court should issue a certificate of appealability after dismissing the petition on procedural grounds.

Holdings

  1. The petition must be dismissed without prejudice because petitioner failed to exhaust available state judicial remedies.
  2. A certificate of appealability should not issue because reasonable jurists would not find debatable or wrong the court's determination that the petition should be dismissed or that petitioner should be allowed to proceed further.

Key quotations

Where a plain procedural bar is present and the district court is correct to invoke it to dispose of the case, a reasonable jurist could not conclude either that the district court erred in dismissing the petition or that the petitioner should be allowed to proceed further. (at 2)

Factual background

Manuel Anthony Castillo is a state prisoner who sought federal habeas relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The magistrate judge determined that Castillo had failed to exhaust state judicial remedies and recommended dismissal without prejudice. Castillo filed no objections to the findings and recommendations.

Procedural history

Petitioner filed a state habeas petition in federal district court. The matter was referred to a magistrate judge, who recommended dismissal without prejudice for failure to exhaust state judicial remedies. Petitioner did not object within the prescribed period, and the district court conducted de novo review, adopted the findings and recommendations in full, closed the case, and declined to issue a certificate of appealability.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…